Dozens of military pensioners’ cases dismissed at once: the pension cap stays in force

The cap that stops the net military pension at the level of the average net military pay in the calculation base stays in force, and anyone who hoped it would be struck down on constitutional grounds no longer has anything to lean on. By Decision No 35 of 20 January 2026, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 692 of 21 August 2026, the Constitutional Court dismissed as unfounded the pleas raised in dozens of cases pending before tribunals and courts of appeal across the country, from Covasna and Iași to Dolj, Arad and Bucharest. This is not the first time: the Court has already confirmed that the cap on the military state pension is constitutional in other cases this year as well.

Three things were on the table at once. First, Government Emergency Ordinance No 59/2017 as a whole, the act that rewrote the regime of service pensions. Second, Article 84 of Government Emergency Ordinance No 114/2018, which once again amended Articles 59 and 60 of Law No 223/2015 on military state pensions. Third, the operative part of a 2021 ruling of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, which holds that the increase granted for the „Meritul Militar” order also falls under the cap.

The Court dismissed the first two complaints as unfounded and the third as inadmissible. The reason the third was not even examined on the merits is one of jurisdiction: the Constitutional Court reviews laws and ordinances, not the rulings by which the High Court unifies judicial practice.

What it changes in practice

The first effect is that the cap stays. Article 60 of Law No 223/2015, in the wording given by Article 84 of Emergency Ordinance No 114/2018, provides that, when the military state pension is established, the net pension cannot be higher than the average of the net monthly military pay or salaries corresponding to the gross amounts included in the calculation base. That rule continues to apply.

The second effect concerns indexation. The amount of military pensions in payment on 31 December is indexed automatically from 1 January with the latest average annual inflation rate, a final indicator communicated by the National Institute of Statistics. If the rate is negative, pensions are not indexed. Both rules remain unchanged.

The third effect has to do with what happens when indexation pushes the pension above the cap. The law allows the resulting amount to be granted, but not above the sum obtained by applying the average annual inflation rate to that average net military pay. Where indexations follow one another, the limit is calculated cumulatively, by adding the inflation effect of the earlier operations. The Court left this mechanism untouched.

The fourth effect concerns the increase granted for the decoration. By Decision No 16 of 13 September 2021, the High Court had established that military pensioners decorated with the „Meritul Militar” order, third, second and first class, are entitled to an increase of 10%, 15% and 20% respectively of the pension amount, but without that increase pushing the net pension above the cap. Dismissal as inadmissible means that this interpretation remains binding on the courts.

The fifth effect is procedural, but it matters for pending cases. The decision is final and generally binding, so the courts that had stayed proceedings while waiting for the Court’s answer can resume hearing the cases, and can no longer set aside the contested provisions. The same line held in September 2026, when the Court ruled that the cap also swallows the supplement paid through the contribution for the supplementary pension, after twenty years of payments.

What has changed compared with the previous situation

In substance, nothing changes in the content of the law. What changes is the certainty. Until this decision was published, dozens of cases were pending with the same open question, and some courts had even stated their view that the plea was well founded. The Bucharest Court of Appeal, the Craiova Court of Appeal, the Harghita Tribunal, the Târgu Mureș Court of Appeal and the Dolj Tribunal had all considered the provisions unconstitutional, relying mainly on the absence of an opinion from the Legislative Council when the 2017 ordinance was adopted.

The second change is that the procedural argument falls away. Alongside the right to property and the standard of living, those who raised the pleas had also invoked a breach of Article 79 of the Constitution, which concerns the Legislative Council, as well as the limits of legislative delegation set out in Article 115. The Court found that the same provisions had already been examined against similar complaints and upheld its earlier solution.

The third change relates to how old the dispute is. The Court listed six earlier decisions by which the same provisions had already been declared constitutional, the oldest from December 2021 and the most recent from December 2024. The finding that no new elements had arisen means that the case law on this point is now settled.

What does not change is the right to a pension itself. The decision concerns the way the pension is calculated and updated, not the existence of the military state pension or the conditions for granting it.

Advantages and disadvantages

Practical advice

Frequently asked questions